Monday, June 28, 2010

That's the advice of Lenore Skenazy, author of the book Free-Range Kids and founder of the movement with the same name. Writing in her "Oddly Enough" column at Forbes, she gives three reasons why "the sex offender registry is making our kids LESS safe":

Recently I consulted my local Serial Killer Registry and found out I'm living next door to a guy who killed three lunchroom ladies when they refused to give him seconds on the chili!

Oh please. I'm kidding. There's no registry of murderers out there. There's no armed robber registry either. Not even one for drunk drivers. No, the only easily available registry for all Americans to consult is the Sex Offender Registry.Because ex-sex offenders are so much scarier than murderers?

No, the reason there's now a sex offender registry in every state ... is that sex offenders have become the focus of intense parental fear. Who could blame us moms and dads, when we hear about kiddie kidnappings 24/7 on the news? The problem is not with nervous parents. The problem is with the registries. Turns out, they're worse than useless.

They are making our kids LESS safe. How? Well, there are three big problems with the registry.

2 comments:

"Misunderstangs cause distrust"As do myths. It is just starting to become known that over 90 percent of sexual assaults were committed by a family member or a person living in the same household as the victim and by close friends and neighbors to the victim "NOT BY A STRANGER" jumping out from the bushes.The sex offender who was a stranger (the worst kind)is only 3.5 percent and the case where someone is killed is 1 percent. The major majority of sex offenders (over 80 percent are the low threat,low profile one time arrest and conviction of what in a laymens terms are the wrongful and unlawful (do to its sexual intent)touching,feeling,groping WITHOUT the intent of force ,fear,violence,injury or the threat of violence.

The massmedia and newsmedia reports and expolits and sensationalizes on the sexual crimes that had violence or a death this causes the general public to become afraid, then becomes enraged and of course the state not wanting to appear soft on crime start making laws that end up making laws that appear to help at the time but in the end, only hurt everyone and makes our children and women more at a risk than before.

The lifetime tracking of sex offenders make the general public think that all persons with a sexual crime in their past is somehow forever broken, this myth needs to be changed by a simple change in the law by stating that "UP TO LIFETIME" this allows for the ending of that myth and it allows for the state to still apear not to be soft on crime and allows for the courts to be stable yet flexable as per case by case convictions and only persons who are the true and present danger to the public end up being tracked for a lifetime being it is known that these persons do have emotional disorders that run long and deep to the point that they may never be truly not a danger to the public.As for the major majority the low threat,low profile cases, keep track of them untill it is obvious that it was a one time offense then weed them out of the system that will lighten the load by over 80 percent and will save major funding for the state and that ends up being a win,win situation for everyone,and of course ther are no 100 percent there is always going to be a few that fall through the cracks but with our new exams like the static 99 things are much much better than they were years ago and it is now known that sexual rehab does infact work.

I truly hope someone reads this comment for it gets to the real meat of the issue.

The State of California has caused more sex offender myths and misunderstandings than all the other states put together.

By being the first state to start lifetime tracking of sex offenders back in 1945 this alone caused most persons to believe that all sex offenders were forever going to keep offending and that there was no cure to prevent it.By not informing the general public that over 90 percent of all offenders being tracked knew the victim well, the general public took it for granted that 90 percent or more of the offenders must be strangers to the victim.

By not telling the general public that over 80 percent of the offenses were low threat, and without the use of any force, fear, violence, injury or threats to use violence this alone with most of the newspapers,TV News Radio talk shows etc. Only reporting the worst sex offensesThe general public took it for granted that 90 percent or more of the sex offenders must be sexualy violent.(only 3.5 to 5 percent of all offenders are violent.

The State of California when it made its ALL sex offenders must not live within 2000 feet of a school or a park (this law was made due to the general public being so upset do to some recent sexual offenses in the news) Did so without informing the general public whatsoever of the sex offender myths that it new about all along. And did not inform the general public of these myths before putting in the new law WHY? So not to appear to be soft on crime and to allow for its general public to feel that their children was going to be more safe knowing all along that it was not as bad as it appeared to be do to its own myths that the state itself created.

The State of California never has told the general public that sexual offenders rehab and therapy is working.The myths that the State of California created goes on and on and untill this state starts telling its general public the truth (not by some internet sites being most persons do not look at these sites)but by broadcasting them on TV, and the NewsPapers, radio talk shows etc. things are only going to get worse. There needs to be some sort of damage control with regards to keeping down the myths.Or one heck of a class action law suite.I am relating to the low end offenders that violated years and years ago oh about 80,000 or so in California alone NOT the true dangerous offenders.

Subscribe to newsletter

Two quick and easy ways to support the blog:

Karen Franklin, Ph.D. is a forensic psychologist and adjunct professor at Alliant University in Northern California. She is a former criminal investigator and legal affairs reporter. This blog features news and commentary pertaining to forensic psychology, criminology, and psychology-law. If you find it useful, you may subscribe to the newsletter (above). See Dr. Franklin's website for more information.

Book reviews at Amazon

Dr. Franklin is a frequent reviewer of books and movies. Browse her reviews here. If you find a review helpful, please give positive feedback. (Click on "Permalink" and then on "Yes," this review was helpful.)